>>an artifact is a spurious finding, such as one based on either a faulty choice of variables or an over-extension of the computed relationship. Such an artifac

>>an artifact is a spurious finding, such as one based on either a faulty choice of variables or an over-extension of the computed relationship. Such an artifact may be called a statistical artifact. I know exactly what was meant, the problem is you've provided absolutely no evidence that it is a measurement artifact(!). You simply stated "it might be". What kind of "scientific reasoning" is that exactly? Please tell. The onus is on you to provide evidence to back up your claims, or admit that you flippantly dismissed study results simply because they run counter to your point. That is what is at issue. I made a point and provided supporting evidence. You have not. I made no "accusations" other than that.